Are Mommybloggers Misunderstanding the Marketing Game?
by Rita ArensAs traditional publishing continues to experience lay-offs and lower ad revenue, the mommyblogger demographic has grown and flexed its opinion-leader muscles, as evidenced by the recent Mom 2.0 conference. People who weren't paying attention to us as writers a few years ago are scrutinizing us now. In fact, it seems we have our own Forrester report.
In this report, analyst Sean Corcoran recommends that marketers add "sponsored conversations" with mommybloggers to their overall repertoire. I haven't read the entire report, but I'm assuming "sponsored conversation" means "give a blogger product and ask that they blog about it" as opposed to "sponsored content," which means "put my logo above your blog post or somewhere in the middle so that when people read your post, they see my logo without you commenting on it."
I'm trying to decide if a sponsored conversation is different from a product review and, if so, if there are different rules. Product reviews have been around in media for a very long time. Magazines have done them for years. Consumer Reports built a brand around their outstanding product reviews. But what the heck is a sponsored conversation, and are they something we as mommybloggers want to have? (I know I am killing some of you with the word "mommyblogger," but Forrester used it, so I'm going to use it to maintain a common nomenclature. Also, I can't think of anything else that succinct.)
Jeremiah Owyang, also of Forrester, lists blogs who have sponsored conversations and includes BlogHer for its conference swag.
I'm a little befuddled at that inclusion, because while BlogHer does do product reviews via its members, conference swag is just ... conference swag. There's not necessarily an understanding between blogger and sponsor that this exact item will be discussed in a certain place within a certain time period. If the product is unique or useful enough, it'll make its way organically into blog posts or onto Flickr, but there's not the same agreement that a review blogger makes when she agrees to review a product. Also, I've been to all sorts of conferences in my professional career, and they all have swag. Swag in and of itself is not worthy of being included in this discussion, as it's not unique to women or to mommies.
Regardless ... here's the thing. Magazines and newspapers that do product reviews comply with journalistic standards, which require full disclosure and transparency about the reviews, the relationship of the parent company of the periodical with the parent company of the product being reviewed, etc. A journalist who's not completely transparent is a journalist who will not be working long. There's an ongoing discussion in the blogosphere and the marketing community about whether or not product reviews should be full-disclosure, journalistic reports or (and I say this respectfully) whether bloggers should just print the press release.
Marshall Kirkpatrick of Read Write Web points a gentle finger at mommies who want a piece of the action as well as his swag-receiving, professional-blogging colleagues:
Admittedly we say this from a position of privilege, as professional bloggers. Shouldn't everyone be able to get a piece of the action? We are sympathetic to this position, but can't help but feel like it's a morally ambiguous argument. Other than marketing bloggers, it seems that much of the "Pay Per Post" crew is made up of "mommy bloggers." Who would tell a mom with a blog that she doesn't deserve to make a buck, too? It's easy to be high minded about writing as an art when you make a comfortable living doing it.
Well, then maybe it is. I don't think anyone is arguing against mommybloggers being able to turn their personal blogs into money-making entities, or even that mommybloggers should turn down an Amazon gift card to road-test something they might have bought anyway out of curiosity. The issue isn't whether or not mommies should make money or whether mommies are qualified to do product reviews or have sponsored conversation, the issue is transparency. Just say you're doing a review, say you received money to attend the amusement park -- say you didn't pay your own money for whatever you're talking about, so that other people can decide for themselves whether they want to spend theirs.
Transparency is the holy grail of the publishing world. Oprah led the book world in an outcry a few years ago over James Frey's "memoir," A Million Little Pieces. We weren't mad because he wrote a good story -- it was still a good story -- but because he led us to believe it was a true story. The same outcry applies when a blogger's readers find out she didn't actually use or like a product she gushed about on her blog in exchange for something of value. Ick, ew. But so easy to avoid.
Reviewing products is a legitimate service best offered by bloggers. If one of my friends, blogger or otherwise, told me she thought I would love a pen that writes upside down and in rainbow ink, I would trust her even though I'd never respond to that ad in a million years. I would and have given products a second thought based on someone I respect liking them. That purchasing influence is what mommyblog reviewers are offering, and that credibility and value proposition is what mommybloggers must work so hard to protect.
Some mommybloggers are actually paid bloggers, trained as writers, who apply journalistic standards to their writing. They may also do product reviews. I don't think that's the group we're arguing over here. Mommybloggers are attractive to marketers for our ability to persuade, but it's a risky proposition: lose your credibility, and you'll lose your swag.
We can all and we should all understand how to reveal pay for play and understand that accepting a product for review or a trip to a conference doesn't mean you can't be objective about the brand offering it. You can uphold your own product reviewing standards when talking to marketers. As Liz Gumbinner once said at BlogHer, "You're not just your own editor, you're your own publisher. You decide who gets space on your blog."
There are rules. You can't review a product or a destination or a conference without experiencing it. I have no patience for marketers who try to trick mommybloggers into writing positive things without giving the blogger any touch-see-hear-feel exposure to the product. I have turned down several blog tours from prominent firms because they were asking bloggers to write positive things about a product that they wouldn't send to the bloggers. Writing about something you haven't experienced creates an ethical dilemma: If you say it's great, what if you're wrong? What if you really wouldn't have liked it had you seen it or used it? And if you say it's great and you don't really know, you're hurting your credibility as a reviewer and as a writer in exchange for a $25 Amazon gift card.
I'm not saying every mommyblogger needs to go to J-school in order to be taken seriously. Pay attention to transparency, and for the most part, you won't hurt your credibility or your checking account. In order for blogger reviews to work, people have to be influenced by the blogger's opinion. The more authentic you are, the more people will trust you, and the more they trust you, the more they'll trust your review. Review something that's great and everyone's happy -- the marketer gets a positive review, and you get a product you'll love using and recommending to your friends.
The debate regarding journalistic standards for bloggers is far from over, and it's not just about mommybloggers and dish soap. Journalism and blogging can be different things, or they can be the same thing. The media industry hasn't coined a great term for the citizen journalist or the professional blogger that clearly differentiates those who are conforming to journalistic standards and those who are chronicling their lives for fun and posterity and may even exaggerate for comic effect.
I believe in the future the industry will come up with some sort of seal you can put on your blog to indicate you are conforming to journalistic standards, much like the seals e-commerce sites put up to indicate they were protecting your privacy and security. I actually wish such seals existed now -- it would make doing research much easier.
Blogging isn't going away. We can't put the genie back in the bottle. Publishers are already facing the problem of sorting and selling community-generated content. Hearst is putting column inches up as a prize for the fittest citizen journalist. That's great, but are bloggers ready? According to the 2009 Media & Entertainment Predictions report from Deloitte, it's hard to monetize community content in its current format without a nice, editorial scrub, which insinuates that bloggers are essentially amateurs who are creating more and more content as the publishing industry produces less and less. The media industry is experiencing an unprecedented sea change that hasn't yet settled out.
Kirkpatrick goes on to say:
Bloggers are replacing mainstream media and we believe that the community as a whole has the same kind of obligation to inform the public at large about those topics that we're dedicated to covering. Objectivity may be something we're transcending, but that doesn't mean we have to swing so far the other direction that we become cheap tools of corporate interest.
My friends, if we want to be on the paying side of that sea change, we have nothing but our blogging reputations to fear.
Posted In
Related Topics
BlogHer Conferences
- Home
- About Us
- BlogHer Community
- Conferences
- BlogHer Network
- Special Offers
- Contact Us
Follow us on Twitter:
@blogher @bloghersupport @blogherdeals
Become a Facebook Fan
© Copyright 2009 BlogHer | Terms of Service
Comments
Fantastic information.
Fantastic information. I have never been offered any perks, and merely review what interests me. I am not a journalist, just a licensed cosmetologist who started blogging for my personal clients. I have wondered about all of the professional journalists, and what they think about the reviewing that is corporate sponsored. I would be interested to see if blogging in the future has something similar to the "Good Housekeeping Seal Of Approval".
http://iwannabeacelebbutimtoopoortoaffordit.blogspot.com/
http://lvmomssincity.blogspot.com/
Is transparency REALLY there with print
journalism?
I'm thinking of the New York Times' special magazine for perfume. It's nothing more than a showcase for perfume advertisers.
When newspapers publish recipes from new cookbooks, they're getting free content without having actually MADE the recipes.
When all the fashion/beauty/etc magazines 'review' products, sure enough, there's an ad for the same product within a few pages.
Where's the transparency with this?
THAT said, the MSM media practices buttress your point -- that bloggers CAN do it differently, that we CAN accept products/services for review so long as we give REAL reviews.
My own policy when accepting an offer is to accept upon the condition that I (1) might/might not actually try it (2) that even if I try it, I might not write about it and (3) if I do write about it, I'll both disclose that it was provided to me and write what I really think.
Interestingly, the "good companies" understand/accept/embrace the power of this. The others? I never hear from them again, offer rescinded.
Alanna Kellogg
Kitchen Parade &
A Veggie Venture
And now I have a great new idea
The kids who come to my sons' next birthday party, the ones who will go home with a goodie bag? They will be called "Sponsored Guests" and I will require a written review of thier stay at Chez Mr Lady as well as a testimonal to the fact that my kids have the best parties. Preferrably in tshirt form.
:)
Mr Lady www.whiskeyinmysippycup.com
Journalistic Standards
As a former lifestyle reporter, I had to comply with journalistic standards when doing reviews. That's what I'm used to and that's what I practice at my blog -- refusing all offers to send me products because I don't want to compromise my personal goal of objectivity. But blogs have different implied relationships between writer and reader than newspapers, don't they? I mean, newspaper readers at least start with the premise that they're getting unbiased and objective writing (except for opinion pages, of course). As much as I love reading other women's blogs, I never think that I'm getting the whole and unvarnished truth. A blog is a person's voice. A newspaper is a document of record. Apple, meet orange.
Cathy
cathylwood.wordpress.com
Transparency is key
I agree, we need transparency. If we're hoping to be part of a community then we need to be able to trust each other. And how can you trust someone who is concealing the truth? I would never begrudge anyone a perk or benefit that they derive from blogging, but it's important to be honest about it.
And now where do I get me some of those perks? ;)
~ Amber
www.strocel.com
I think the writing industy has been
struggling
for a good definition of blogger for a long time, one label isn't going to fit all bloggers. That's the problem with definitions, they are always messy. One blogger might have more than one blog and wear a different writing hat in each.
I feel like a little fish in deep water. I dare say I'm not alone. Thanks for giving us something important to think about.
Sandhill Sis
www.reclaimsimplicity.com
Discover how rich and hilarious life can be when it's simple. Tales and tips on making money mind, riding the recycle, simple food, homegrown music and gardening and more.
Blogging for Business Turns me Off
That said, there are a lot of great writers/bloggers who blog for business so well that we don't even notice they are doing it and those, those are the talented ones. But yes - I am not a fan of reading stuff just because a mom, or anyone else for that matter, was thrown some free product in her direction and now she's writing about it simply because she was asked.
I think fine, if that's your cup of tea. But to me, it's degrading. I can't tell you how many times I've deleted the most absurd of offers via email from pr people not willing to take the time even to see if what they are hocking actually applies to me, my blog or my readers. And each time it feels like a slap in the face!
The flip side of that is that there have been incredible genuine, real and honest to goodness offers come my way that I was more than happy to take. The overnight trip to a Great Wolf Lodge opening in the PNW was just such a thing. A free stay for my entire family, a meeting with the C.E.O. and V.P. of Marketing in which they simply wanted to know about us, the "mommybloggers," and how to approach us. They also shared their stories of success in the corporate world, but mostly just picked our brains. And of course I blogged about it, but I was NEVER asked to do so. Like you said, it came organically and honestly and I'm pretty sure that came across in my writing.
It's a slippery slope indeed. I'm interested to see what happens when bloggers cave to these unreasonable offers and I wish they didn't feel like they had to. It's their blog, and they should "own" it, not some product.
Hope this makes sense, thank you for a thought provoking post!
Carrie at Stop Screaming I'm Driving!
This is very interesting
This is very interesting stuff here.
I'm not opposed to the idea of product reviews and the like. The times I decide to participate in something, I see it as a public service. I'm always offering my opinion on all kinds of things as it is; why not work with companies/PR folks if they are promoting something I'm actually interested in?
That said, I believe in and practice transparency. A product review not only gets labeled as such, but I also always state something to the effect of being asked to try something out and being offered the product.
Honestly, it never occurred to me that someone would NOT do that. Maybe because while I never worked as one, I have my degree in journalism? Or because I work in the public sector where transparency is key? Not sure, but to gush about something without revealing you were asked to write about it seems iffy to me. It goes without saying for me that if I choose to write about something, I will be honest about it.
I also have a personal policy about product reviews and the like: it has to be something I am geniunely curious about or would try anyway, or something (if it's writing about a cause or contest) that has some relevance to my blog or my life. If I were to write about everything I'm asked to write about, my blog would stop being about me and my life and just be one big shill, which is not an option. Further, I don't have enough time in my day to try products or promote things that I have no interest in. Nothing is really worth that to me. Like Carrie, I delete a lot emails from people who clearly have no clue what my blog is about, or what I've said in the past about this very topic.
I don't knok anyone who does whatever they feel they need to do, but I do feel pretty strongly about the need for transparency.
Tere
A Mom, a Blog and the Life In-Between
Great Post
Great post, Rita. I personally prefer a "moms that blog" descriptor with "mommybloggers" being a subset of the first group. Mommybloggers are those that focus their writing on the day to day trials and tribulations of being a mom while Moms that blog might write about other things from the perspective of being a mom.
ANYHOO, marketing and moms seem like a perfect match, but I think you're right that it's all about transparency. I don't see anything wrong with marketers offering products or moms writing about products, as long as they're upfront, honest and transparent about it all.
Amy@UWM
Up With Moms
What About Affiliate Marketing?
Excellent post, timely, well thought-out and thorough!
I am just now considering monetization more seriously for my green and natural parenting blog, now nearly a year old. Since beginning to blog this issue has been a very serious concern for me. Having studied internet marketing, I've very aware of the kinds of posts and links that shout out, "Sponsored!" "Affiliate!" even when the blogess herself does not make mention of her income stream.
My concern has always been a) the general public is not as aware as bloggers and marketers are of the mechanisms by which a web publisher can receive compensation b) the whole concept of not only journalistic integrity but also interpersonal integrity is marred when transparency is not cultivated.
You make mention directly of "pay for post" above, but I also have concerns about affiliate marketing. As one previous writer (whose name escapes me now) pointed out, affiliate bloggers who include contextual links in their posts have even more incentive to gush about their products than pay for post-ers. Because they are paid only on commission, the money is not yet in the bag for them. Yet, they do not fall under the traditional blanket of "sponsored article" as no money has exchanged hands at the time of their writing.
In that regard, I actually decided to make use of the "(aff)" tag on my blog for full disclosure of affiliate links, even when I'm just including a quick amazon link for a book I mention briefly. Though it's a bit wonky and waning in popularity, the "aff" standard was something I felt I needed to implement to keep it clean.
Meanwhile, I see on other blogs hints of moving in the opposite direction: implementation of link cloaking software that actually modifies link text to make an affiliate link look exactly like a non-tagged link.
Search for "affiliate link cloaking" and you'll find the results saturated with software companies more than happy to help bloggers intentionally disguise their income stream.
The FTC has recently proposed extending its jurisdiction over endorsement fraud regulation to bloggers. Although lobbyists are scrambling to loosen the FDA's reach, I believe the FTC's proposed rules can help shape our conversations about transparency and WOM ethics.
I love the idea of a seal for journalistic integrity. Until then, when conversations move from one mama to another, we need to remember that ethics must come to the forefront, or we're just handling dirty money!
Love,
Mama Hope
a la hippie dippie bébé, A Natural Parenting Blog
good points Mama Hope
Both your examples of affiliate links and disclosure policies raise great points.
I think it would be hard to argue deferred/affiliate compensation models do not hold the same potential conflicts as direct sponsorship. In fact, one could argue affiliate relationships carry more authenticity risk than straight gifts/cash because the blogger must succeed at converting a reader if they hope to be compensated for their time/effort.
As for disclosure policies, the one you linked was a great example. I think Rita's wish for a framework like Privacy Policies already exists and it's called Disclosure Policies (modeled after Privacy Policy framework). It's something I've blogged about for awhile over at disclosurepolicy.org. Given the diversity of blogs and bloggers in the world, a framework like Disclosure Policies provides readers a standard phrase to search for ("Disclosure Policy") to understand the policies and conflicts of the blog they are reading. This post and comment stream alone declares multiple disclosure policies people use, but having a "policy" is of little use if it's not documented in a standard place (your blog) linked by a standard phrase readers can find ("Disclosure Policy"). The key is matching author and reader expectations, and DPs make that possible.
Great post Rita and insightful comment Mama Hope...
Timely post
as I'm a newbie on the reviewing front. I've been approached before but only recently decided "why not?". I couldn't imagine not trying something I'm giving a review about. I guess I'm not a very good "faker". I can see the blogosphere through marketers' eyes as having such huge potential, especially given the mother/parent/consumer demographic.
I intend to be as open and transparent as I can be, and would hope that I can maintain integrity by only reviewing things that are pertinent to me. And I know I get chuckles at the homefront when considering cleaning products. Despite what the house looks like, I do clean occasionally.
I'm still laughing at Mr. Lady's comment above too...
K-MEG
And once again, Rita nails it
I have been circling around a lot of these topics for a while now (as you know) and you just concisely summed up so many of these complex issues. As this medium emerges, so will the rules and the standards and the levels of acceptability.
In the end, the audience will let you know when you've crossed the line. And then, hopefully, you can pull back.
Even big celebs get a pass for doing weird cigarette commercials in Japan.
Carrie makes a brilliant point about "caving" to pressures from marketers. It can be a slippery slope if you don't manage your relationships well and define your own boundaries. But I stand by my view that what a blogger gets in return for a review may not be monetary compensation - sometimes fodder for a great post is enough.
I also like your cautionary point that really, every blogger who accepts graft should tattoo to their foreheads backwards so they can see it in the mirror:
Mom-101
Cool Mom Picks.com
I talked to the WSJ today about this post.
Clearly, this issue is of interest to mainstream media. As a result of my conversation with this fellow, I've added the following disclosure to Surrender, Dorothy: Reviews:
Surrender, Dorothy: Reviews Disclosure
is a review blog, not a personal blog. Marketers send me products for
free, and I agree to review them. Sometimes they offer me a small fee
for my time. This fee covers my time, but it doesn't buy a positive
review. My time is valuable, and there are many other income-producing
ways I could spend it. I choose to do reviews because I believe they
have value in our culture.
I recommend everyone make an extra effort at transparency. It can't hurt.
Rita Arens writes at Surrender Dorothy and BlogHer and is the editor of Sleep is for the Weak.
The stench of shill.
Rita, this is great.
I just got a freelance writing opportunity from an ad agency to write sponsored posts for one of their client's products on "Mommy Website."
What I love about this is that it doesn't compromise the integrety of my personal blog. I'm not linked to the sponsored post--maintaining my integrity as a blogger--and yet it let's me use my experience in advertising and blogging to make a few bucks.
There's no question that advertisers need to be using blogs and social networks for marketing purposes, but it should be clear when they are doing it. Like you said, letting your readers know that you were given a product to try and review is fine, so long as you're honest about it.
I think most of us can smell the stench of "shill" a mile away.
Oh, and I sent this article to my agency contacts.
The post these comments inspired
After reading this conversation and the one started by HeatherB, I decided to review BlogHer's philosophy here:
The elephant in the room: How BlogHer is cracking the code on editorial content and paid advertising
Thanks everyone!
Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette
BlogHer is non-partisan but our bloggers aren't! Follow our coverage of Politics & News.